Post by: JonLeung on March 27, 2006, 02:28:30 PM
Source
That hurts the N64 line-up. Certain Rare games such as Diddy Kong Racing and Donkey Kong 64 are still possible, it sounds like, but totally original works of Rare's including the two Banjo-Kazooie games, Jet Force Gemini, and Blast Corps are off the list.
And what about pre-N64 games? While Donkey Kong Country is likely to be in Nintendo's grip, what about Solar Jetman and the Battletoads games and PinBot?
Now-Microsoft-owned-Rare is likely going to have their shooter/arcade games released on the Xbox Live Arcade's service, which to be honest, I'm not too familiar with, but sounds a lot like the Revolution's Virtual Console. GoldenEye 007 (once navigating the legal minefield of who has the rights and who'll get the profits), Perfect Dark, and the two Killer Instincts will probably be there.
I actually really liked the ludicrousness of Killer Instinct and the collectomania of DK 64, at least a lot more than other people seemed to. GoldenEye is like a license to print money, and it's a shame, especially if anyone had taken its inclusion in that survey a while back as any sort of hope that the Revolution could have it. The N64 was Rare at its absolute finest (Grabbed by the Ghoulies, WTF?) so maybe that's why Microsoft is intent on holding onto them, even if an Xbox 360 owner doesn't seem to be the type to want to play with a teddy bear who likes to collect honeycombs.
Post by: Arbok on March 27, 2006, 02:41:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Sorry if this is old, I just haven't seen it mentioned here.
Source
"Neither are gamers likely to see Goldeneye 007, unless both Rare and new license holder EA commit it to Nintendo's platform. "
How is Rare still a factor with Goldeneye? I would think that it would be more in the hands of who holds the Bond license for video games then something that's up to Rare, considering it wasn't a original property that they created anyway and Nintendo published it.
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
And what about pre-N64 games? While Donkey Kong Country is likely to be in Nintendo's grip, what about Solar Jetman and the Battletoads games and PinBot?
Does anyone really care much about the pre-DKC games, though? Of course it would be nice to have, more is always better, but they weren't anything special.
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Now-Microsoft-owned-Rare is likely going to have their shooter/arcade games released on the Xbox Live Arcade's service, which to be honest, I'm not too familiar with, but sounds a lot like the Revolution's Virtual Console. GoldenEye 007 (once navigating the legal minefield of who has the rights and who'll get the profits), Perfect Dark, and the two Killer Instincts will probably be there.
How do you figure? Somehow I doubt Nintendo is going to let Microsoft try to emulate one of their systems to have those games appear on there.
Post by: Ceric on March 27, 2006, 02:47:10 PM
As mentioned earlier I doubt Nintendo would allow an emulator on the x-Box but I'm sure that it could be redone with no real problem without using an emulator. I'm sure they still have all of the original assets.
Post by: Dasmos on March 27, 2006, 02:49:26 PM
Post by: jasonditz on March 27, 2006, 03:05:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
I didn't' read the article so this might be covered. I thought that all rights went to the publishers most of the time. So if the publisher wanted to rerelease your game it was really up to them. That is unless when MS struck the deal they also bought the rights to publish past Rare games as well.
As mentioned earlier I doubt Nintendo would allow an emulator on the x-Box but I'm sure that it could be redone with no real problem without using an emulator. I'm sure they still have all of the original assets.
True, but they're missing a key ingredient for Goldeneye: the license.
It's one thing to emulate an old game that they made long ago... but a port to a different platform very likely would require the permissions of the current license holders.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on March 27, 2006, 03:47:05 PM
Post by: Artimus on March 27, 2006, 03:49:08 PM
Post by: jasonditz on March 27, 2006, 04:31:42 PM
Post by: MaryJane on March 27, 2006, 05:01:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
The only real losses are Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, and I guess a Banjo game. Rare's best work besides its two-FPS isn't on the 64 (regardless of bloated Banjo comments from some people).
I'm just wondering if you played jet force gemini? I loved it.
Post by: Svevan on March 27, 2006, 05:12:19 PM
Post by: capamerica on March 27, 2006, 05:46:56 PM
But as jasonditz said "To me getting Square-Enix on board is way more important than getting Rare on board."
Post by: BranDonk Kong on March 27, 2006, 05:52:23 PM
Post by: Pale on March 27, 2006, 06:51:11 PM
Banjo Kazooie
Banjo Tooie
Goldeneye
Perfect Dark
Blast Corps
All of those games were published by Nintendo. There could very well have been something in the contract that says they can republish them.
Edit: Also, Battletoads was apparently published by Tradewest... are they even still around in any form?
Post by: Arbok on March 27, 2006, 10:20:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
Doing a quick scan of some of Rare's games...
Banjo Kazooie
Banjo Tooie
Goldeneye
Perfect Dark
Blast Corps
All of those games were published by Nintendo. There could very well have been something in the contract that says they can republish them.
The KI games too, but Nintendo let Rare keep the character properties to all of those except Goldeneye (because they couldn't, of course), which is why I never expected to see them appear on the service.
Post by: wandering on March 27, 2006, 11:02:00 PM
Quote
No big lost to me, The only decent Rare games in my book were the ones where they used someone elses franchise.
Eh. Kazooie > DK.
And you didn't like Perfect Dark?
Quote
You must realize that nobody ACTUALLY thought that Rare owned games were going to be on the virtual console.
Well, IGN did...
Post by: thejeek on March 28, 2006, 01:15:45 AM
Post by: Talon on March 28, 2006, 02:23:16 AM
I dont know exactly how the videogame industry works but if its anything like the movie industry then a distributor (publisher) may have a license to distribute a movie on vhs for predetermined amount of time then say years go by and the license of that movie changes hands through buyouts and takeovers and then the distributor wants to distribute that movie again but this time on dvd they have to acquire a new license for the movie even if it is from the original company.
I think out of goldeneye, perfect dark, jet force gemini, blast corps and banjo kazooie Nintendo has the best chance at getting goldeneye onto their virtual console because I do believe EA holds the bond license. However I do not know how much of goldeneye RARE may still own, it is possible that when the bond license was taken over by EA, RARE may still own certain parts of goldeneye.
This is going to be a stumbling block for any non-nintendo made game, especially if the company who made the game does not exist anymore. Tracking down the licenses can be a real nightmare.
On the other hand games like perfect dark, jet force gemini, blast corps and banjo kazooie may never see the light of day again depending on Nintendo's publishing agreements. Even though RARE may own the IP's we dont know what sort of agreement RARE made with Nintendo when these games were published on the N64 and we dont know what agreements still exist when Nintendo signed RARE over to Microsoft. Also it maybe illegal (definately unethical) for Microsoft to make a N64 emulator to play these games so the only way they could appear on Microsoft's Virtual Arcade is if they were built from the ground up (now is that worth RARE's time?).
For now lets just appreciate all the games that we know we will get to play again and lets leave the legalities for Nintendo to battle it out.
Post by: Terranigma Freak on March 28, 2006, 04:28:52 AM
Quote
To me getting Square-Enix on board is way more important than getting Rare on board. Rare's games always depended a lot on being visually cutting edge, and games like that just don't age that well.
Wait wait wait... so you're saying Square's games DON'T depend a lot on being visually cutting edge with about as much gameplay as ET?
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 28, 2006, 07:17:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Terranigma Freak Wait wait wait... so you're saying Square's games DON'T depend a lot on being visually cutting edge with about as much gameplay as ET?
FF3 US certainly wasn't graphically impressive but I can find quite a few people who would sign their name in blood on a petîtion to bring that game to the virtual console.
I'm dead f__king serious.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 28, 2006, 07:28:28 AM
Legalities like this always piss me off. I don't like it when something I like and want to buy legitimately is out of print or is butchered (this happens a lot with music rights) because of crap like this. I've always thought there should be some sort of historical archive clause in copyright law so that we can always have access to something as it originally appeared without lawyers messing it all up.
Post by: vudu on March 28, 2006, 07:58:09 AM
Post by: capamerica on March 28, 2006, 08:19:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
Edit: Also, Battletoads was apparently published by Tradewest... are they even still around in any form?
From what I've been able to find out Tradewest owned the Battletoads franchise. And Tradewest was purchesed by Midway. But since the Battletoad games were created by both Rare and Tradewest its unsure if Midway could release them on the VC. And as to Why Midway hasn't done anything with the Battletoads franchise is a mystery, My guess is that Battletoads didn't do to well on the SNES and Midway much rather pump out so-so Mortal Kombat sequals then put in some effort in creating a new Battletoads game.
Post by: TrueNerd on March 28, 2006, 08:45:05 AM
Post by: Dirk Temporo on March 28, 2006, 09:54:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
...Perfect Dark...
All of those games were published by Nintendo. There could very well have been something in the contract that says they can republish them.
Perfect Dark was published by Rare.
Post by: Pale on March 28, 2006, 11:01:16 AM
Post by: bustin98 on March 28, 2006, 12:00:43 PM
Strangely, both Goldeneye and Banjo Tooie lack any indication of who published or distributed the games. Perhaps its just to be assumed its Nintendo. Both games claim Copyright by both Nintendo and Rare, so it would seem Nintendo had some rights to Banjo, more so than to Conker. But I'm sure the payment for Rare took care of those copyright claims. And someone is borrowing Banjo Kazooie so I can't compare what that box has.
Post by: Artimus on March 28, 2006, 12:33:49 PM
Conker and PD are definitely Rare.
Post by: Pale on March 28, 2006, 02:52:49 PM
I feel like way to many people are caught up in who owns the franchise, when, in this case anyway, I think it is more important who owns the publishing rights to said specific titles.
Post by: Deguello on March 28, 2006, 03:58:01 PM
Back in 2002, MS said they were greatly relieved that Nintendo did not embroil them in a difficult legal battle that would have assuredly ended in Nintendo victory and the retention of Rare's old IP. Nintendo was very amicable about the deal, although in my opinion they should not have been.
Now it becomes clear that they should have kept all the Rare-created IP and told them to go hang. These old games are not a threat to MS in any way, and their exclsuion will do nothing to tamp down feature of mega backwards compatibility. What it MIGHT do is start gamer's attitudes in the opposite direction. And it may turn out that Nintendo has all the rights anyway, as the "confirmation" only comes from MS and Rare. And if that is the case, I say publish and burn the bridge. They already tried to, anyway.
Post by: Ceric on March 28, 2006, 05:13:08 PM
The key to this argument is to point out that Microsoft has money in the DS and GBA titles. I mean they allow for franchise they own to go to those systems. They could make them for PSP or to boost there own Windows Mobile platform, while not gaming but still.
I think in the end if the licensing is good and Microsoft sees a big demand; they'll release it for the Nintendo Virtual Console. The board meeting will go like this:
MS Exec: How much will I make from Putting this on Nintendo's Virtual Console compared to redoing it for Live Arcade?
Number Pusher: Since the game would have to be rebuilt from scratch you would make more from Virtual Console even taking in account lost hardware sales.
MS Exec: Great. We'll use the VC money to fund the uber redo that will come out for the 360. We'll use it as advertisement and an oliver branch for the moment. I am truly brilliant
Number Pusher: Yes, my master.
Post by: IceCold on March 28, 2006, 06:55:02 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 28, 2006, 09:05:13 PM
Post by: ruby_onix on March 28, 2006, 09:44:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: bustin98
Right on the box of both Perfect Dark AND Conker's Bad Fur Day it says 'Published By Rareware'. Perfect Dark says 'Distributed By Nintendo'. You have to pull out the instructions for Conker to see that Nintendo is the 'Exclusive' distributor of it.
Strangely, both Goldeneye and Banjo Tooie lack any indication of who published or distributed the games. Perhaps its just to be assumed its Nintendo. Both games claim Copyright by both Nintendo and Rare, so it would seem Nintendo had some rights to Banjo, more so than to Conker. But I'm sure the payment for Rare took care of those copyright claims. And someone is borrowing Banjo Kazooie so I can't compare what that box has.
Here's a snippet from Nintendo's 2001 financial report.
The ones on the right are the so-called second parties. The ones on the left are fully-owned first party companies.
Before they updated with the new Microsoft info, the US Patent Office website used to say that "Rare Limited" (the one on the left, owned 100% by Nintendo) was the company that owned all of the games which claimed to be published by Rareware. All the others were apparently owned by Nintendo.
It seems likely that Rare wanted more recognition for their work, so Nintendo (the one with all the money and power in the relationship) juggled some paperwork to make it look like Rare was actually publishing their own games.
Before Rare left, Nintendo transferred ownership of the typical "Rare" properties (and not things like Donkey Kong Country or Starfox Adventures) over from themselves and "Rare Limited" over to the real Rare, which was then absorbed by Microsoft. The details of the exchange don't appear to be public knowledge, but some things are obvious.
Sooo.... what's worth more? Banjo Kazooie and Perfect Dark on the Virtual Console, or entirely new games from Rare on the DS?
Post by: Ian Sane on March 29, 2006, 06:42:55 AM
Virtual Console. The Rev needs more help than the DS and Rare's classic games are better than their new ones.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 29, 2006, 06:45:46 AM
Post by: vudu on March 29, 2006, 08:14:58 AM
Post by: BlackNMild2k1 on March 29, 2006, 08:35:13 AM
QuoteBecause Rare games on DS would be more like Rare games on N64, and those games were good(at least the ones that i have played).
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The Rare GBA games have sucked, from what I heard. I don't see why Rare games on the DS would be any better.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on March 29, 2006, 09:22:59 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
Hmm link dirk? According to both IGN and Gamefaqs, it was published by Nintendo.
In case this hasn't been resolved. Right here: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v181/Shralla/PD.jpg
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 29, 2006, 09:31:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BlackNMild2k1 Because Rare games on DS would be more like Rare games on N64, and those games were good(at least the ones that i have played).
I dunno, have you seen their latest works?
I don't have much faith in Rare anymore.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 29, 2006, 09:32:22 AM
Post by: MaryJane on March 30, 2006, 04:37:13 AM
Post by: BranDonk Kong on March 30, 2006, 05:18:30 AM
Post by: capamerica on March 30, 2006, 06:46:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: MaryJane
Let's hope that when the xbox360 crashes with the release of the revolution and ps3 and the suckiness of halo3 that Nintendo will buy Rare again, or Rare will become independent and desperate for cash will of course sell the rights to our favorite games. I wanna play jet force gemini again.
That situation is Highly unlikely, I don't think Nintendo would ever want to take Rare back.
Most likely IF the Xbox360 were crashed (which I think is highly unlikly) Microsoft would desolve Rare into Microsoft Game Studio and then sell off any of Rare's assests that they didn't want to keep.
Thank God for that, cause I wouldn't want to see any Rare games on my Nintendo system ever again.
I mean damn it people the Rare you knew and loved Died years ago, get over it!
Post by: bustin98 on March 30, 2006, 10:50:14 AM
Quote
I mean damn it people the Rare you knew and loved Died years ago, get over it!
All hail Zoonami and Free Radical!
Post by: iMoron on March 30, 2006, 01:40:31 PM
They rarely delivered on time...
Their games rare... Freking few, and rather hard at times (battletoads, Or golden eye's inposible invincible mode) or the OVERDONE item colectiveness of Banjo Kazzuy or DK64... or the cheap loses in RC ProAM ... the Dloble runs (returning to the same parts to collect something of some thing again) more (GFG) ... or ... bad cheazy commedy (I did not find Conkers'BFD fun, in no way fun...) ...
Actually what did they had, Golden Eye... PD... and Killer Instink ... Blast Corps... RCpro AM was cool but I HATE those cheap loses where the other cars would run 3 laps in 3 seconds!...Diddy Congs Racing was fun untill half way true the game (dodle run, @#$@#$# coins, and $#@%%% $#$#$%%$ hard boss, moust anoying gaming moment besides Banjo and DK) Starfox Adventures was BLA... oh look *furry buts and tails* ...bland...
I won't miss them much... It took them ages to realease a game, look how they are on the XuxsBox and XuxBox Flush... How many Games will they manage this generation? 4... Yup PD0.5 will come out 2009... and Conkers Hurd Hours Cantina 2020...
And their past offering for Nintendo consoles have been few and far ... even if good games they where few... and Nintendo still holds some of the IP... maybe not much but if they want they can realease from those IP's they (Nintendo) still owns...
Rare is no big deal in a way... Shure it would be nice... but not terific etcep for a few games...
Post by: animecyberrat on March 31, 2006, 07:32:35 PM
Is it possible that Midway actualy does have soem publishing rioghst to Ki and can therfore bypass Rares rights and allow the game to goto VC?
KI was one of my favorite SNES games, the n64 was so so but not as good as the fist. It all reminds me of when they were auctioning off accliams righsta while back, Mortal Kombat was on the list eventhough Midway owns the righst to that 100percent, yet somehow Acclaim still had righst to the work they had done, so it could be similar situation here. I contacted Midway about that also and they told me that They still own MK and all righst to it, all acclaim had was righst to the home consoles (SNES, GEN) versions.
I think that if Nintendo wanted to, and they should, they could very well fight for the righst to all the games they publsihed considering they may have publsihing righst which means thay can reuse them as long as the rights havent expired.
